Topic: Gay marriage threatens the sanctity of marriage and trivializes its meaning.
Anonymous A started this discussion 14 years ago #21,688
Apparently, the rate of divorce between married couples somehow doesn't.
squeegee !firstkPE1Q joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 35 minutes later[^] [v] #343,936
first
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 49 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #343,937
Okay.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 27 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #343,941
You fool. If we legalise gay marriage, the flood gates will be open! I mean, what next? Will we have adult-child marriages? People marrying dogs? These are both things which will obviously happen once gay marriage comes in and devalues marriage. It's a slippery slope, I tell you.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 30 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #343,944
> ban gay guys from getting married
> complain that gay guys lack fidelity
> complain that gay guys lack fidelity
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #343,948
@343,941 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
we need to legalize man-inflateable woman marriges and then buy stock in popcorn companies
we need to legalize man-inflateable woman marriges and then buy stock in popcorn companies
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,028
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,032
Soon people will want to Marry something like thisKiller Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,034
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,036
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Yep. Now we put horny teenagers on sex offender registries that will cause them to be shunned from society.
Yep. Now we put horny teenagers on sex offender registries that will cause them to be shunned from society.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,038
@previous (A)
It really is sad how badly pedophiles are treated in our modern world. Truly, we exist in a dystopia.
It really is sad how badly pedophiles are treated in our modern world. Truly, we exist in a dystopia.
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,043
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,045
@344,038 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Yep, two mid-teenagers having sex like how they're genetically hardwired to do sure are pedophiles. They definitely need to be put on the same list as the one for old men that kidnap small children to force himself upon them.
Yep, two mid-teenagers having sex like how they're genetically hardwired to do sure are pedophiles. They definitely need to be put on the same list as the one for old men that kidnap small children to force himself upon them.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 8 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,050
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,051
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
My point is that we have gone too far in our pursuit against pedophiles. It's like chemo, it may destroy the pedophiles, but it also harms normals as well.
My point is that we have gone too far in our pursuit against pedophiles. It's like chemo, it may destroy the pedophiles, but it also harms normals as well.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 31 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,067
@previous (HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q)
Having and enforcing an age of consent isn't "too far". It's a line you need to draw somewhere.
Punishing offenders less or not at all depending on their age relative to the other party and their intent sounds ideal, but I imagine that it could easily become a legal clusterfuck.
Having and enforcing an age of consent isn't "too far". It's a line you need to draw somewhere.
Punishing offenders less or not at all depending on their age relative to the other party and their intent sounds ideal, but I imagine that it could easily become a legal clusterfuck.
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,073
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I quite like Minnesota's approach.
> If the actor is in a position of authority, the age of consent is 18. If the victim is under the age of 13 the actor must be no more than 36 months older. If the victim is 13, 14 or 15 the actor must be no more than 48 months older.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#Minnesota
I quite like Minnesota's approach.
> If the actor is in a position of authority, the age of consent is 18. If the victim is under the age of 13 the actor must be no more than 36 months older. If the victim is 13, 14 or 15 the actor must be no more than 48 months older.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#Minnesota
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,081
@previous (HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q)
13/14 sounds a bit young to me, but apart from that if it's been enforced properly then I can see the good in it.
13/14 sounds a bit young to me, but apart from that if it's been enforced properly then I can see the good in it.
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,086
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
13/14 probably is too young for you, unless you're no more than 36 months older.
Jokes aside, why would you want to have high schoolers arrested for having sex with each other?
13/14 probably is too young for you, unless you're no more than 36 months older.
Jokes aside, why would you want to have high schoolers arrested for having sex with each other?
squeegee !hbZVTk6JYc joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,089
@previous (HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q)
They should be doing their homework or working. They haven't earned the right to enjoy sex until they file income taxes once.
They should be doing their homework or working. They haven't earned the right to enjoy sex until they file income taxes once.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 13 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,090
@344,086 (HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q)
I'm actually 14 myself, so it'd be fine.
Never said I'd want them arrested. Just a warning and maybe minor penalties like fines would work.
I'm actually 14 myself, so it'd be fine.
Never said I'd want them arrested. Just a warning and maybe minor penalties like fines would work.
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 11 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,097
@344,089 (squeegee !hbZVTk6JYc)
lol
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Charging people for having sex? I know there is a term for that. What is that called again...? Oh, right. Prostitution.
lol
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Charging people for having sex? I know there is a term for that. What is that called again...? Oh, right. Prostitution.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,099
@previous (HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q)
It was just an off-hand suggestion since I couldn't think of something slightly more suitable. Calm your tits, Walter.
I was thinking about if they're both underage, though. If only one is, then that Minnesota law is more or less okay.
It was just an off-hand suggestion since I couldn't think of something slightly more suitable. Calm your tits, Walter.
I was thinking about if they're both underage, though. If only one is, then that Minnesota law is more or less okay.
(Edited 53 seconds later.)
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 31 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,100
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 43 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #344,101
@344,099 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Maybe they could call their parents if caught.
Maybe they could call their parents if caught.
(Edited 16 seconds later.)